Benghazi memo edits show State, White House involvement

A top State Department official pressed the CIA and the White House to delete any mention of terrorism in public statements on the Benghazi terror
attack to prevent critics from blaming lax security at the consulate, according to documents obtained by ABC News. The information "goes right to the
heart of what the White House continues to deny," Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, told USA TODAY. "For eight months they denied there's any
manipulation, but this continues to shed light on something that was never true."

I don't think this will wind up being a Watergate or a Monicagate. Not because it perhaps doesn't deserve the attention, but because the last two
administrations have been pretty much out of reach from both media and public,.

Just as Bush got away with so much, Obama seems destined to the same soft landing. It may be that those in the hidden folds of power simply won't
allow it or because there is always a patsy ready to fall upon their sword for the emperor. In this case, Hilary seems a likely candidate for that
self-sacrifice.

Kind of odd... there's no love lost between the Clintons and Obamas but... in politics, that doesn't matter.

A top State Department official pressed the CIA and the White House to delete any mention of terrorism in public statements on the Benghazi terror
attack to prevent critics from blaming lax security at the consulate, according to documents obtained by ABC News. The information "goes right to the
heart of what the White House continues to deny," Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, told USA TODAY. "For eight months they denied there's any
manipulation, but this continues to shed light on something that was never true."

Republicans: "Duuh, hello we've been pointing this out for a long time now!"
Democrats: "Huh, er, what? *sigh* This Benghazi stuff is old news, nothing to see here. Hey did you see that Jodi Arias was convicted the other
day?"

Not sure what you're saying. Are you playing the "poor democrat always gets picked on" card?

Look here, Bush 2 should have been impeached, He did the mother of all coverups, but the Dems did $^*$ to take him to task. Now we finally have a
group of whistleblowers and congressmen that are coming forward and speaking up and asking hard questions that are LONG overdue!

Let's be glad people are doing their job, and trying to get to the bottom of who is accountable.

I'll admit, on the surface this doesn't look good. But I still say reserve judgment until all the facts are out - to me, this sounds like knee-jerk
reaction without knowing the full context of the edits. For instance (yeah, I know, a left-wing rag):

Moreover, an update the ABC report undermines the notion that Nuland’s motives were campaign related or political:

A source familiar with the White House emails on the Benghazi talking point revisions say that State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland was raising
two concerns about the CIA’s first version of talking points, which were going to be sent to Congress: 1) The talking points went further than what
she was allowed to say about the attack during her state department briefings; and, 2) she believed the CIA was attempting to exonerate itself at the
State Department’s expense by suggesting CIA warnings about the security situation were ignored.

In other words, ABC’s “exclusive” reveals a turf battle, not some cover-up. As it turns out, the story is more about how talking points are
generated in the interagency process, a point the Hill newspaper took notice of in its headline reporting on ABC’s story:

I'm not playing any cards. This is a damn tragedy and complete lack of leadership, honor, and integrity. The president should resign over these lies
and the coverup like Nixon did. This is monumentally worse than Watergate because four Americans are dead and the lies and changing of the Intel was
done to try and preserve a presidential campaign. The rescue team was told to stand down because the president was trying to get reelected.

They knew they were about to be attacked they asked for enforcements. Someone at the top said no. They were rumored to be supplying weopons through
this post, so maybe it was time to close the post.-my guess.

Then someone assumed the story would go under the radar, the attack, but it didn't because important people were removed of duty on the spot that
couldn't comprehend that no back-up was called in (General Ham). Yeah, a general was fired for wanting to do something to protect our assets.

The whole thing was a clusterfrick so a story needed to be created. Took 4 days for it to be posted, was revised, between CIA and WH until a
palatable story was concocted.

there were no protests at Benghazi. To even bring that in as a reason to this remote outpost attack is ridiculous.

After the attack and the story of it spontaneously erupting from a video, guess what? The whole middle east started riots and protesting and you can
bet, people suffered in those riots, fueled directly from this "story".

Originally posted by redtic
So, feel free to make final judgments without knowing all the facts, but I still see a lot less "there" there than many are making out...

That process would be much easier if the Admin wasn't doing everything in their power to prevent any facts from coming out. They have been
beligerant and obfuscatory even with Congress. I'm sorry, but generally the side trying their damndest to hide the facts has a reason to hide them.

Originally posted by redtic
So, feel free to make final judgments without knowing all the facts, but I still see a lot less "there" there than many are making out...

That process would be much easier if the Admin wasn't doing everything in their power to prevent any facts from coming out. They have been
beligerant and obfuscatory even with Congress. I'm sorry, but generally the side trying their damndest to hide the facts has a reason to hide them.

I understand the frustration, but the bottom line is, however frustrating it is, that no one really knows all the facts yet. To indict an entire
administration, or just key people within it, as many here and on the hill want to do, without knowing those facts is premature at best. Things seem
to be coming to a head - I hope all of the facts do finally come out - I suspect, in the end, we'll end up moving beyond a distraction, rather than
indicting an administration. (And, no, I'm not being dismissive of the fact that people died here - of course that's a bad thing and deserves some
closure).

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.